Madeleine McCann

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by Pia

I doubt it, even though she only works one day a week as a GP i'd take a risk saying she's on more money than i get in a week And he's a consultant cardiologist. It only goes by income doesn't it?
I thought i read somewhere that a wealthy british businessman had offered to pay all their legal costs.

Yep, I also did read that while there are some who are no longer financially backing the McCanns there are others that will continue to do so.

[TheNorm]

There is an excellent editorial in The Sun today by Fergus Shanahan (Deputy Editor) entitled "Kate McCann's guilty of nothing more than sticking to her story" - I'd provide a link but can't find it on the website. Here is a quote*:

The decent mother whose life revolved around her children is put before the court of public opinion and found GUILTY.... There's something very nasty about the anti-Kate mood that's gathered such strength this week that it is blowing through the country like a hurricane. It reminds me of those witch hunts in the Middle Ages...

This article alone is worth the 20p cover price. Most of the rest of the paper can be used to start the barbeque.

*less that 10% quoted to avoid copyright infringement.

[peanut]

I stopped when I read 'decent mother'......Sorry.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by peanutkp

I stopped when I read 'decent mother'......Sorry.

So you know her personally?

[peanut]

No, but I do have the luxury to decide as and when I feel is the right time to reach my own conclusion. I'll base my thoughts (not that they mean anything anyway), when the case is closed and I'm satisfied myself.

Till then, if I say she's a great mother then it comes out that she did do the nasty then what? If I say she's nasty now and she's cleared of all, I'll still have what she did to start with, that is enough for me for the time being.

I haven't convicted her of any wrong doings, apart from the obvious.

A lot of people seem to be taking the leap from "how stupid were they to leave their children unattended" (which I don't think they should have done) to "murdering child-killers", seemingly based on the "evidence" supplied by the newspapers, who often contradict each other (and themselves).

There is an interesting article linky, which contains a video from "The Onion" which is their viewpoint on how the media escalate and over-dramatise when insufficient evidence is available. It also contains some comments from Max Hastings, ex-editor of the Telegraph -
"I hang my head in shame at what my trade has made of the McCann story. Unless an outsider is caught and convicted of Madeleine's death, the reputations of the McCann family are irreparably damaged. Before charges or any trial, an irremovable stain of suspicion has been cast by police, and broadcast by the media."

What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

[Mr_love_monkey]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

I think it was the first one taken out back and shot in the head, when society started to collapse

[punky]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

A lot of people seem to be taking the leap from "how stupid were they to leave their children unattended" (which I don't think they should have done) to "murdering child-killers", seemingly based on the "evidence" supplied by the newspapers, who often contradict each other (and themselves).

There is an interesting article linky, which contains a video from "The Onion" which is their viewpoint on how the media escalate and over-dramatise when insufficient evidence is available. It also contains some comments from Max Hastings, ex-editor of the Telegraph -
"I hang my head in shame at what my trade has made of the McCann story. Unless an outsider is caught and convicted of Madeleine's death, the reputations of the McCann family are irreparably damaged. Before charges or any trial, an irremovable stain of suspicion has been cast by police, and broadcast by the media."

What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

Unfortunately for sex crimes and crimes involving children, there has never been any such thing. The emotiveness of the crime and desire for 'justice' mean people latch on to the first possibilities they can.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Gavin

Unfortunately for sex crimes and crimes involving children, there has never been any such thing. The emotiveness of the crime and desire for 'justice' mean people latch on to the first possibilities they can.

Yes, but I think there is more to it than that. The media love to place someone on a pedestal (slowly, over several weeks) then bring them crashing down to earth (again, over several weeks, as if in slow-motion). Often the "victims" are politicians or celebrities, which is bad enough. But seeing a family treated in this way is disgusting.

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Yes, but I think there is more to it than that. The media love to place someone on a pedestal (slowly, over several weeks) then bring them crashing down to earth (again, over several weeks, as if in slow-motion). Often the "victims" are politicians or celebrities, which is bad enough. But seeing a family treated in this way is disgusting.

The media is just appealing to the nasty instincts of the public though. Who love to hate. Although the media has been quite supportive of the McCanns in the UK...

[Osem]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

ABC figures for the month of August 2007 -
The Sun - 2,933,654
The Daily Mail - 2,137,069
Daily Mirror - 1,436,436
Daily Express - 765,483
Daily Star - 674,450
Daily Record - 398,288

Total of 8,345,380 copies purchased, and it is estimated by the newspapers that at least two other people reads a purchased copy, gives you nearly 25 million readers of the tabloids - over 40% of the UK population is not a smallish proportion, imho.

People are asking why the McCanns need a PR firm - since they are being tried by the media, it may be useful to have a media professional advising them.

The point being made by TheNorm was about those people who actually BUY this stuff as opposed to those who might pick up a copy and glance at it. It appears that the figures you quote for this extra readership are only estimates provided by the companies who produce the stuff - not exactly unbiased then. Also how many of these people actively seek out stuff like the McCann stuff as opposed to just reading the sports pages and looking at the naughty pics ?

Originally Posted by Osem

The point being made was about those people who BUY this stuff as opposed to those who might pick up a copy and glance at it. It appears that the figures you quote for this extra readership are only estimates provided by the companies who produce the stuff - not exactly unbiased then.

From ABC, the independent measuring body, actually.

[Osem]

Hmmmm that's not exaclty what your first post stated though is it ?


"Total of 8,345,380 copies purchased, and it is estimated by the newspapers that at least two other people reads a purchased copy, gives you nearly 25 million readers of the tabloids - over 40% of the UK population is not a smallish proportion, imho."

If there were no McCann type stories for a month of Sundays these people would still buy their rags.

[Mr_love_monkey]

Originally Posted by Osem

naughty pics ?

Originally Posted by foreverwar

independent measuring body

There's a job I woudn't mind!

[iglu]

Since the last hour or so, we had no Press releases from the McCanns, entertain yourselves by looking of some nice pictures of the murder/abduction/accident scene....